TV and Media Musings...
Oct. 13th, 2006 11:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatThe more I read about The Prestige - the more I want to see it. Am really hoping it pops up at my neighborhood cineplex, the one on Court - which currently appears to be showing every inane gross-out comedy and horror flick released. The only movie there that appeals on any level is The Departed which is also showing at the less comfortable and less optimal arthouse theater (yet, far cheaper). Besides movies being within walking distance and not requiring a trip by subway, these theaters have the added benefit of having $5-$6 afternoon showings. Evening showings range from 8-10 dollars. In Manhattan they are $10.50. Which is why I've become picky about movies lately.
The Prestige has several things going for it. Amazing cast. Seriously. Christian Bale. Hugh Jackman. Michael Cain. David Bowie. Andy Serkis (the guy who played Gollum), and Scarlett Johannson. It is directed by Christopher Nolan (Memento and Batman Begins). And it is based on a really interesting fantasy novel that is just a tad creepier and darker and more realistic than most novels about magic. Haven't read the novel - but I've flirted with it more than once at Colisieum Books. Plus the whole tale like the novel is set up much like a magic trick - its touted as the type of movie that plays with you, that you'll want to see more than once. In short, it is different narratively and structurally than most movies. It was filmed in LA using handheld cameras and they did not go over board creating a Victorian set, using instead camera and lighting to convey what was needed. It and The Fountain by the guy who wrote and directed Requiem for a Dream and Pi are the only two movies that I'm anticipating. The others, sure interested. But these two pull at my curiousity. They also both feature Hugh Jackman, which is a plus. Truth is Bale, Jackman, Caine and Bowie are actors/performers I've been known to compulsively follow about in films regardless of content or director, not so much Bowie (prefer his singing to his acting, although I did watch at least three films he was in). And Nolan is a director - who I've been known to follow about since I adore his style - yes, I know women aren't featured in most of his works. Don't care. Like him anyway.
That said there are three flicks at local art house that I'm considering checking out this weekend, assuming I'm not too burnt on the visual media. (Too much tv watching, far too much this week. It's like crack cocaine for the visually stimulated.) They are Science of Sleep, The Departed (Although I think I'd prefer the original foreign version Infernal Affairs - not a huge Matt Damon/Leonardo Di Capro fan. Actually okay on Damn, Di Caprio tends to annoy me. That said, I ain't seeing it for them - I'm seeing it for Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen and Mark Walhberg. Also, I like Scorsese, even if the last good film he made was whichever one of these was last: Goodfellas, Age of Innocence, or The Last Temptation of Christ. Have not liked the films he made with Di Caprio at all.), and Infamous - fascinating cast and a story that equally fascinates - not the murders, the potential journalistic exploitation and investigation of them for self-promotion and profit - which is to a degree a commentary on our own media's or *cough*NancyGRaceCNN*cough*.
At home, waiting for my viewing pleasure, courtesy of netflix, sits Thank You For Not Smoking featuring yet another actor I shamelessly follow from movie to movie, Aaron Eckhart, who reminds me of a thinner more attractive version of Phillip Seymore Hoffman for some reason or other.
On the TV front:
According therags entertainment mags - Heroes has been picked up for a full season.
As have The New Adventures of Old Christine and some other situation comedy I could care less about,so can't remember. Not that I care about New Adventures of Old Christine, I just can't forget the title. Wish it would go away, don't see it happening.
Heroes on the other hand am somewhat pleased about but not overly surprised. I've met very few people online who don't like it. Structurally it fascinates me, enough that I'm sorely tempted to analyze it but am resisting the urge -( been there, done that, do not have the time and energy for a repeat - or my family may throw me into an aslym for the television obsessed, which they've considered). It is possibly the most innovative thing I've seen in a while regarding its use of the narrative storytelling format. In some ways it reminds me of what JMS tried to do with Bablyon 5. A "telenovel" approach. Starting each episode with a "chapter" title. Interlocking separate subplots and gradually interweaving them together. Each character's subplot is introduced separately, but all have a common interlocking theme, the suspense is how do they come together. It's sort of a reversal of The Lost narrative structure - where we start with all the characters being thrust together, then back-track through flash-backs showing how that came about. In Heroes, the story is about how they come together, if they come together (not a foregone conclusion they necessarily will), what happens when they do, does it work out, etc. Unlike Lost - Heroes starts with who these people are before the event happens that brings them together. Lost is the narrative structure thrown up in the air and scrambled, which I'm sure annoyed some people - I loved it. Playing with and analyzing narrative structures makes me giddy or ahem turns me on.
In this past week's New Yorker, Tv critic Tad Friend, discusses The Lost copycats, notably leaving out Heroes, Friday Night Lights, and Studio 60 which have two things in common - all are on NBC and all do not copy Lost, House or 24 - they are completely new concepts in of themselves. Not attempts to recreate past successes. Anyhow, Friend says and I agree, that The Lost copycats all build from a huge event, and show us how each character's story is connected to the others - unfortunately each character's back story is incredibly cliche ridden, to the point in which you begin to wonder if they are recycling scripts. Of the copycats, The Nine appears to be the most innovative narrative wise, yet it still has those cliche's - goodlooking/heroic cop with a gambling problem, authority issues, and a girlfriend who dies on his watch? But it's gripping because the secret isn't what lies in the character's pasts - as in Lost, but what happened in the bank that caused them to bond and care so deeply about one another? Nine is written in such a way that the audience feels as if they are trying to solve a crossword puzzel with only the Across clues given to them. And that is interesting.
If The Nine feels cliche ridden, Jericho is downright trite. It basically retreads every disaster cliche done, including the worn out prodigal son motif. But people like it. It's being renewed and it is coming in second in its time slot, beating Bones, and coming in second to Dancing With The Stars. Go figure. Look, I have no understanding of why people like what they do, if I did, I'd be a hell of a lot more successful in my life, trust me. Am curious to see how 30 Rock and Twenty Good Years do. But am having difficulty caring all that much. All the shows in this time slot sort of bore me. Twenty Good Years did make me laugh, but not hard enough to tune in next week.
Six Degrees is the slickest of the three copy-cats, but doing the worst ratings wise. It suffers from the audience knowing more than the characters, which only serves to frustrate the audience and make them scream at the characters to stop being nitwits. Lost allows the audience to find things out before the characters do, but in such a way that it is suspensful, we want to know how the characters will catch up and mildly humorous or ironic. That's when it works. (Okay when it worked, granted Lost has not been working so well lately, but that could change soon.) I agree with Friend. And honestly think The Nine, Jericho, and Six Degrees will be gone in two years. Do not see any of them making it. Jericho may make it the longest, so if you are a fan of Jericho - don't worry. I wish they'd spend less time copying narrative structures and more time building interesting characters. It's not the structure of Lost that sold it to people, it was the characters.
Studio 60 is struggling but I would not discount it quite yet. The network is 100% behind it and proud of it. Also ratings wise it is scoring in the demographic that appeals most to advertisers - the 18-49 high wage earner demos - which means expensive car commericials. While it struggles against CSI Miami, CSI is not appealing to the high wage earners (mostly because the high wage earners got burnt out on all the L&O's by now and find CSI silly by comparison). I love it, but I like dry wit and adore entertainment biz dramedy's. And at least five percent of my flist seems to adore it as well by five percent, I mean more like five people that post continuously. 5 out of 20 is what percentage wise?? Actually flist's likes and dislikes are fascinating and impossible to predict, except for Heroes. I knew everyone would like that once the Japanese guy hit the screen, with a few possible exceptions.
Kidnapped, Vanished, and Smith are all gone. Say hasta la vista as they wrap up their episodes. Smith apparently won't even get that much. CBS gave up on it.
And BattleStar Galatica - it's getting rave reviews from everyone. Currently considered the best thing on the air. Can't see I disagree. Continues to surprise me and pretty damn close to flawless this season. I'm addicted to it. I admit it. Even when it frustrates me.
Friday Night Lights is in the same boat as Studio 60, the network is proud of it and loves it so wants to nurture it for a while and see where it goes. NBC remember is the network where low-rated shows such as Cheers, Night Court, Seinfeild, Hill Street Blues, St. Elsewhere, and Homicide Life on The Streets were given a chance to locate audiences - even if it took at least a year and a half to do so. So there's hope.
It's odd, a year or so ago, I'd given up on NBC as only delivering Law and Order copies and reality shows, now it's actually going to the mat and offering up some interesting dramas. I think CBS's CSI's and ABC's hit dramas scared it into doing something different. The pendlum always shifts sooner or later, don't it?
The Prestige has several things going for it. Amazing cast. Seriously. Christian Bale. Hugh Jackman. Michael Cain. David Bowie. Andy Serkis (the guy who played Gollum), and Scarlett Johannson. It is directed by Christopher Nolan (Memento and Batman Begins). And it is based on a really interesting fantasy novel that is just a tad creepier and darker and more realistic than most novels about magic. Haven't read the novel - but I've flirted with it more than once at Colisieum Books. Plus the whole tale like the novel is set up much like a magic trick - its touted as the type of movie that plays with you, that you'll want to see more than once. In short, it is different narratively and structurally than most movies. It was filmed in LA using handheld cameras and they did not go over board creating a Victorian set, using instead camera and lighting to convey what was needed. It and The Fountain by the guy who wrote and directed Requiem for a Dream and Pi are the only two movies that I'm anticipating. The others, sure interested. But these two pull at my curiousity. They also both feature Hugh Jackman, which is a plus. Truth is Bale, Jackman, Caine and Bowie are actors/performers I've been known to compulsively follow about in films regardless of content or director, not so much Bowie (prefer his singing to his acting, although I did watch at least three films he was in). And Nolan is a director - who I've been known to follow about since I adore his style - yes, I know women aren't featured in most of his works. Don't care. Like him anyway.
That said there are three flicks at local art house that I'm considering checking out this weekend, assuming I'm not too burnt on the visual media. (Too much tv watching, far too much this week. It's like crack cocaine for the visually stimulated.) They are Science of Sleep, The Departed (Although I think I'd prefer the original foreign version Infernal Affairs - not a huge Matt Damon/Leonardo Di Capro fan. Actually okay on Damn, Di Caprio tends to annoy me. That said, I ain't seeing it for them - I'm seeing it for Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen and Mark Walhberg. Also, I like Scorsese, even if the last good film he made was whichever one of these was last: Goodfellas, Age of Innocence, or The Last Temptation of Christ. Have not liked the films he made with Di Caprio at all.), and Infamous - fascinating cast and a story that equally fascinates - not the murders, the potential journalistic exploitation and investigation of them for self-promotion and profit - which is to a degree a commentary on our own media's or *cough*NancyGRaceCNN*cough*.
At home, waiting for my viewing pleasure, courtesy of netflix, sits Thank You For Not Smoking featuring yet another actor I shamelessly follow from movie to movie, Aaron Eckhart, who reminds me of a thinner more attractive version of Phillip Seymore Hoffman for some reason or other.
On the TV front:
According the
As have The New Adventures of Old Christine and some other situation comedy I could care less about,so can't remember. Not that I care about New Adventures of Old Christine, I just can't forget the title. Wish it would go away, don't see it happening.
Heroes on the other hand am somewhat pleased about but not overly surprised. I've met very few people online who don't like it. Structurally it fascinates me, enough that I'm sorely tempted to analyze it but am resisting the urge -( been there, done that, do not have the time and energy for a repeat - or my family may throw me into an aslym for the television obsessed, which they've considered). It is possibly the most innovative thing I've seen in a while regarding its use of the narrative storytelling format. In some ways it reminds me of what JMS tried to do with Bablyon 5. A "telenovel" approach. Starting each episode with a "chapter" title. Interlocking separate subplots and gradually interweaving them together. Each character's subplot is introduced separately, but all have a common interlocking theme, the suspense is how do they come together. It's sort of a reversal of The Lost narrative structure - where we start with all the characters being thrust together, then back-track through flash-backs showing how that came about. In Heroes, the story is about how they come together, if they come together (not a foregone conclusion they necessarily will), what happens when they do, does it work out, etc. Unlike Lost - Heroes starts with who these people are before the event happens that brings them together. Lost is the narrative structure thrown up in the air and scrambled, which I'm sure annoyed some people - I loved it. Playing with and analyzing narrative structures makes me giddy or ahem turns me on.
In this past week's New Yorker, Tv critic Tad Friend, discusses The Lost copycats, notably leaving out Heroes, Friday Night Lights, and Studio 60 which have two things in common - all are on NBC and all do not copy Lost, House or 24 - they are completely new concepts in of themselves. Not attempts to recreate past successes. Anyhow, Friend says and I agree, that The Lost copycats all build from a huge event, and show us how each character's story is connected to the others - unfortunately each character's back story is incredibly cliche ridden, to the point in which you begin to wonder if they are recycling scripts. Of the copycats, The Nine appears to be the most innovative narrative wise, yet it still has those cliche's - goodlooking/heroic cop with a gambling problem, authority issues, and a girlfriend who dies on his watch? But it's gripping because the secret isn't what lies in the character's pasts - as in Lost, but what happened in the bank that caused them to bond and care so deeply about one another? Nine is written in such a way that the audience feels as if they are trying to solve a crossword puzzel with only the Across clues given to them. And that is interesting.
If The Nine feels cliche ridden, Jericho is downright trite. It basically retreads every disaster cliche done, including the worn out prodigal son motif. But people like it. It's being renewed and it is coming in second in its time slot, beating Bones, and coming in second to Dancing With The Stars. Go figure. Look, I have no understanding of why people like what they do, if I did, I'd be a hell of a lot more successful in my life, trust me. Am curious to see how 30 Rock and Twenty Good Years do. But am having difficulty caring all that much. All the shows in this time slot sort of bore me. Twenty Good Years did make me laugh, but not hard enough to tune in next week.
Six Degrees is the slickest of the three copy-cats, but doing the worst ratings wise. It suffers from the audience knowing more than the characters, which only serves to frustrate the audience and make them scream at the characters to stop being nitwits. Lost allows the audience to find things out before the characters do, but in such a way that it is suspensful, we want to know how the characters will catch up and mildly humorous or ironic. That's when it works. (Okay when it worked, granted Lost has not been working so well lately, but that could change soon.) I agree with Friend. And honestly think The Nine, Jericho, and Six Degrees will be gone in two years. Do not see any of them making it. Jericho may make it the longest, so if you are a fan of Jericho - don't worry. I wish they'd spend less time copying narrative structures and more time building interesting characters. It's not the structure of Lost that sold it to people, it was the characters.
Studio 60 is struggling but I would not discount it quite yet. The network is 100% behind it and proud of it. Also ratings wise it is scoring in the demographic that appeals most to advertisers - the 18-49 high wage earner demos - which means expensive car commericials. While it struggles against CSI Miami, CSI is not appealing to the high wage earners (mostly because the high wage earners got burnt out on all the L&O's by now and find CSI silly by comparison). I love it, but I like dry wit and adore entertainment biz dramedy's. And at least five percent of my flist seems to adore it as well by five percent, I mean more like five people that post continuously. 5 out of 20 is what percentage wise?? Actually flist's likes and dislikes are fascinating and impossible to predict, except for Heroes. I knew everyone would like that once the Japanese guy hit the screen, with a few possible exceptions.
Kidnapped, Vanished, and Smith are all gone. Say hasta la vista as they wrap up their episodes. Smith apparently won't even get that much. CBS gave up on it.
And BattleStar Galatica - it's getting rave reviews from everyone. Currently considered the best thing on the air. Can't see I disagree. Continues to surprise me and pretty damn close to flawless this season. I'm addicted to it. I admit it. Even when it frustrates me.
Friday Night Lights is in the same boat as Studio 60, the network is proud of it and loves it so wants to nurture it for a while and see where it goes. NBC remember is the network where low-rated shows such as Cheers, Night Court, Seinfeild, Hill Street Blues, St. Elsewhere, and Homicide Life on The Streets were given a chance to locate audiences - even if it took at least a year and a half to do so. So there's hope.
It's odd, a year or so ago, I'd given up on NBC as only delivering Law and Order copies and reality shows, now it's actually going to the mat and offering up some interesting dramas. I think CBS's CSI's and ABC's hit dramas scared it into doing something different. The pendlum always shifts sooner or later, don't it?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-10-15 03:03 am (UTC)I hope Ugly Betty survives, I'm enjoying that a lot. It doesn't have an intriguing structure or great writing, but I find it to be enormous fun.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-15 04:20 am (UTC)In Betty, the writers deftly combine the over-the-top soap with Betty's family. Watching makes me feel at times I'm watching a soap opera that has been melded with an old school sitcom. Rather fun. Oddly comforting. And sort of sweet. Most innovative thing ABC did this year. Everything else on it's menu is well copies of other shows.
NBC did sort of venture into reality show land, but I give it credit for taking a different tact than the other shows. It introduced "Project Runway", "Queer Help for the Straight Guy " (okay got that title wrong...), "The Apprentice", "Deal or No Deal"
...which tend to be more of a how to do it, contest format. Remember NBC owns Bravo. It also owns the Sci-Fi channel. But it got stale and began to rest on its laurels for far too long - West Wing, ER, Law &Order, Friends, Will and Grace...all these shows first aired in the early 90's, and all lasted well into 2005.
I think CSI and ABC's hit sensations: Grey's, Desperate, and Lost scared it a bit. Not to mention Fox's out of left field "House".
It wants a repeat of those glory years. I'm sort of rooting for it, but partly because ABC has pissed me off this year and I think needs a bit of smack-down. Still watching the hit ABC shows, although like you am disappointed in Housewives and Lost, both are annoying me at the moment. Will most likely be missing Lost this week unless I can grab it on the net.